What are some logical, alternative interpretations or ways of understanding...

[Neogaia777]

What are some logical, alternative interpretations or explanations or ways of understanding and comprehending in a logical, explainable way, other than literal, the Creation account, Adam & Eve and the Garden of Eden, up to whatever point you choose in the Beginnings of Genesis, what are some logical, alternative interpretations or ways of understanding and comprehending in a logical, explainable way, other than literal, the beginnings of Genesis...

Ideas? Theories? On logical alternative explanations or ways of understanding or explaining it other than literal...?

T.E.'s please offer your theories...?

God Bless!

 

[quatona]

Alternatives to taking an ancient writing literally, are:
1. As a somewhat artistic product
a. metaphorically
b. mythologically
2. As the best guess based on the knowledge and data of the time when it was written.

Or a mixture of all these.
Maybe there are more.

 

[Neogaia777]

Hello... I just wanna say, I didn't "choose" to believe, in "spirits" and a spiritual realm, which forced me to explore and search for the truth of (it) and pick, choose and accept a, well, for lack of a better word a "religious" belief system, that led me to accept Christ as God, though I don't seem to "fit in" in any church that I can find, I actually don't like a lot, most, or at least "some" of them (supposed "believers" in Christ as God)... I do not approve, not that my approval matters, but I don't approve of most of them or their "methods", especially... I think there is a much better way, and am seeking to find it... But, I didn't "choose" it, I was "chosen"...

I enjoy a lot of science, and believe that evolution did happen, I am, and have currently, well, "had to" accept the label of "Theistic Evolutionist" and am playing with the idea and theory and exploring the idea also of "Creationary Evolutionist" in my endeavors, I believe there is enough evidence to accept evolution as real and true, but, I have plenty, and I mean "plenty" of "evidence" to satisfy my own self anyway, of their most definitely being the existence of "spirits" and a spirit realm that exists along with this realm... I spent a lot of time in "denial" and flat out "rejection" of this, but, in the end, found I could not deny or ignore it in my life any longer and had to, HAD TO, was "forced to" accept it (as a reality also)...

Just thought I'd share that...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

That all depends on "how" you believe Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden and things in the beginnings of Genesis up to a certain point are "real" or "true"... A few theories, there could have been an evolved species similar to created man that were "bred out", one for the other, or an interbred species was made, Cain perhaps the first one marrying one of these, That species perhaps replacing the created species of man, or the created species eliminated and replaced evolved ape descended man, at the flood, or vice-versa, or that Adam and Eve and up to a certain point in Genesis were a "vision" or a "dream" by someone, meant to interpreted as such that was "inspired" by "spirits" or God that tells a greater, higher truth than we currently know, perhaps about spirits, God and us... Or, it is metaphorical, or symbolic or allegorical or in some other way "true" and very "real" as it pertains to "spirits"...

My point: "It is not "all" of us believers in God and the Bible that are as "closed minded" as you might think, not being "open" to the possibilities, but many scientists who believe only, soley in only what they can "currently" see, know, and observe currently, not being open to the "possibility" of there being "more" than that, "more" to be discovered that will only be able to be "seen and observed" in the future, as is the historical track record of science, who cannot believe in the "possibility" of there being "more" beyond in what he only currently "see or observe" now, when the track record in science has always been that there is always almost usually always "more" to discover to what can be "seen and observed"... (I believe the "more" to be discovered will lead to proof in "spirits" and a "spirit" realm, which the Bible has already told us, but in symbols and likenesses...) (and would or is meant to give us a "jump" on this if we could find the correct interpretation)

Anyways, he "should" be able to "believe" in at least the possibility that there could be "more than this", what he can currently "see and observe", especially considering "how much" of what we can "see and observe" has changed so much over time, (the historical track record of science) and has "forced scientists" to "alter and change" their prior "theories" that were based on only what they could "see and observe" before (then, at that time), cause what they can "see and observe" now, has forced them to change it, meaning that they were previously "wrong"... What makes you think that won't still happen with currently held scientific theories in the future...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Hello... I just wanna say, I didn't "choose" to believe, in "spirits" and a spiritual realm, which forced me to explore and search for the truth of (it) and pick, choose and accept a, well, for lack of a better word a "religious" belief system, that led me to accept Christ as God, though I don't seem to "fit in" in any church that I can find, I actually don't like a lot, most, or at least "some" of them (supposed "believers" in Christ as God)... I do not approve, not that my approval matters, but I don't approve of most of them or their "methods", especially... I think there is a much better way, and am seeking to find it... But, I didn't "choose" it, I was "chosen"...

I enjoy a lot of science, and believe that evolution did happen, I am, and have currently, well, "had to" accept the label of "Theistic Evolutionist" and am playing with the idea and theory and exploring the idea also of "Creationary Evolutionist" in my endeavors, I believe there is enough evidence to accept evolution as real and true, but, I have plenty, and I mean "plenty" of "evidence" to satisfy my own self anyway, of their most definitely being the existence of "spirits" and a spirit realm that exists along with this realm... I spent a lot of time in "denial" and flat out "rejection" of this, but, in the end, found I could not deny or ignore it in my life any longer and had to, HAD TO, was "forced to" accept it (as a reality also)...

Just thought I'd share that...

God Bless!

just theorize with me for a minute, if you had un-refutable proof of such things in your life that you could not deny, but you accepted most science, how would you handle it or approach it...? What would you do? Or, how would you reason it out?, and what would you conclude?

You might say, "I don't know?, (perhaps) Or, that you "don't know" what you would do with that kind of decision until you were actually "faced with it", right...?

Well, I am faced with it...

Can any of you "put yourselves in my shoes" even those of you who may not believe in it and "help" in any way...?

God Bless!

 

[-57]

What are some logical, alternative interpretations or explanations or ways of understanding and comprehending in a logical, explainable way, other than literal, the Creation account, Adam & Eve and the Garden of Eden, up to whatever point you choose in the Beginnings of Genesis, what are some logical, alternative interpretations or ways of understanding and comprehending in a logical, explainable way, other than literal, the beginnings of Genesis...

Ideas? Theories? On logical alternative explanations or ways of understanding or explaining it other than literal...?

T.E.'s please offer your theories...?

God Bless!

The alternative interpretations (Evolution) always seem to destroy or change what the bible has to say.
I will give you a few examples.

The following list is taken from the book of Luke. The list starts out with literal historical people. If an alternative view of the creation account is conceived then the end of the list must be made up of fictional characters. Where does the linage change from fact to fiction? Was King David a real person? How about Enoch?


Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,

Heli,Matthat, Levi, Melki, Jannai, Joseph,Mattathias, Amos, Nahum, Esli, Naggai,Maath, Mattathias, Semein, Josech, Joda,Joanan, Rhesa, Zerubbabel, Shealtiel, Neri,Melki, Addi, Cosam, Elmadam, Er,Joshua, Eliezer, Jorim, Matthat, Levi,Simeon, Judah, Joseph, Jonam, Eliakim,Melea, Menna, Mattatha, Nathan, David, Jesse, Obed, Boaz, Salmon, Nahshon,Amminadab, Ram, Hezron, Perez, Judah,Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, Terah, Nahor,Serug, Reu, Peleg, Eber, Shelah,Cainan, Arphaxad, Shem, Noah, Lamech,Methuselah, Enoch, Jared, Mahalalel, Kenan, Enosh, Seth, Adam, God.

Luke 3:23 Mary’s linage

A Theistic Evolutionary view would require Luke to include made up people in Jesus' linage. One of the reasons the linage was presented is to show that Jesus was indeed King. Too present Jesus' bloodline. Why would Luke writing un the inspiration of God include made up people?

 

[-57]

In the following verse the usage of "one man" must be changed to "an evolving population" if God used evolutionism to create mankind.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.

An evolving population directly contradiction the one man statement made by Paul.

There is also a second verse that support the "one man"

1st Cor 15:21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.

 

[-57]

I'll give you a third verse to consider where an alternative interpretations or explanations of Genesis harms the bible.

Paul in a letter to Timothy provides instruction to the woman. If evolutionism...alternative interpretations....is used to explain the creation account, especially of Adam and Eve then the reason is based upon an event that never happened.

1st Tim 2:13 For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression

The bible would have to be changed here to eliminate the order of formation as well as the deception in the Garden of Eden.

 

[Neogaia777]

In the following verse the usage of "one man" must be changed to "an evolving population" if God used evolutionism to create mankind.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.

An evolving population directly contradiction the one man statement made by Paul.

There is also a second verse that support the "one man"

1st Cor 15:21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.

It is possible that "man" in the Genesis account, perhaps up to Noah coming out of the "ark" after the "flood" could have been a "spirit" or a "spirit man" (Like Jesus Bodily form that was still a form of flesh, but was slightly different from what were used to and was slightly translucent and could apparently pass through doors and walls, before he was taken up (ascended))

Noah and his prior generations possibly being of this kind or sort, before the "flood" possibly even being on another planet or earth possibly or even a spiritual place like "paradise", the "ark" and the "flood" being symbolic of other things, possibly... Noah and his family transported in/by the "ark" from a prior and perhaps a little different existence elsewhere, to another, new place (earth) that was a slightly different kind of existence from where they came from previously, (possibly)...(a possible theory perhaps)...

God Bless!

 

[-57]

It is possible that "man" in the Genesis account, perhaps up to Noah coming out of the "ark" after the "flood" could have been a "spirit" or a "spirit man" (Like Jesus Bodily form that was still a form of flesh, but was slightly different from what were used to and was slightly translucent and could apparently pass through doors and walls, before he was taken up (ascended))

Noah and his prior generations possibly being of this kind or sort, before the "flood" possibly even being on another planet or earth possibly or even a spiritual place like "paradise", the "ark" and the "flood" being symbolic of other things, possibly... Noah and his family transported in/by the "ark" from a prior and perhaps a little different existence elsewhere, to another, new place (earth) that was a slightly different kind of existence from where they came from previously, (possibly)...(a possible theory perhaps)...

God Bless!

That's great science fiction. But, the possible theory isn't remotely close to being biblical.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

We can tease or torture out any meaning we want from the bible story. Keeps it interesting.

 

[Neogaia777]

Genesis, I feel like while I might not fully understand "how", I know that some of Genesis, while it may, or may not be "literally true", in the earthly, worldly sense that a thing is literally true, I know that it is "true" in a "spiritual" way or sense... Which spiritual sense might actually be actually "more real" or "more true" than how all of us, all of we, currently "define" truth in this world currently...

Making a "transition" at some point in the book from that sense of truth, to this current sense; how we currently define truth in this world now or currently at this time... Which is typically how we say literal or logical, based on our "current understanding" of logic and reason, based on our current, shall I say "immature", not fully grown, more "limited" understanding of the "higher" understanding of these, than say, "God"... That is, God's understanding of the "higher" truth of these things which is "spiritual" (truth)...

Which "spiritual" truth, if it ever becomes known, will actually prove to be even "more" logical and "more" reasonable, even more literal, than what we can currently know or can understand about what is logical, reasonable, or literal...

God Bless!

 

[-57]

Genesis, I feel like while I might not fully understand "how", I know that some of Genesis, while it may, or may not be "literally true", in the earthly, worldly sense that a thing is literally true, I know that it is "true" in a "spiritual" way or sense... Which spiritual sense might actually be actually "more real" or "more true" than how all of us, all of we, currently "define" truth in this world currently...

Making a "transition" at some point in the book from that sense of truth, to this current sense; how we currently define truth in this world now or currently at this time... Which is typically how we say literal or logical, based on our "current understanding" of logic and reason, based on our current, shall I say "immature", not fully grown, more "limited" understanding of the "higher" understanding of these, than say, "God"... That is, God's understanding of the "higher" truth of these things which is "spiritual" (truth)...

Which "spiritual" truth, if it ever becomes known, will actually prove to be even "more" logical and "more" reasonable, even more literal, than what we can currently know or can understand about what is logical, reasonable, or literal...

God Bless!

Sounds like you're suggesting Jesus didn't literally rise from the grave on day 3. It was only spiritual.

 

[Neogaia777]

Sounds like you're suggesting Jesus didn't literally rise from the grave on day 3. It was only spiritual.

No, I'm actually not, or didn't "mean to" suggest that at all... How do you get that from what I said? Can you please explain why or how you get/got that from what I said please? (cause I'm not getting it, "how" you got that from that...)

Thanks,

God Bless!

 

[-57]

No, I'm actually not, or didn't "mean to" suggest that at all... How do you get that from what I said? Can you please explain why or how you get/got that from what I said please? (cause I'm not getting it, "how" you got that from that...)

Thanks,

God Bless!

Typically people who speak like you do...spiritualizing the bible...often spiritualize the resurrection removing it from the literal.

 

[Neogaia777]

Typically people who speak like you do...spiritualizing the bible...often spiritualize the resurrection removing it from the literal.

I believe he literally went (or made the "transition" that I talked about), that he literally made the transition from the physical to the spiritual when he was resurrected...? Are you talking about that...?

God Bless!

 

[MasonP]

Sounds like you're suggesting Jesus didn't literally rise from the grave on day 3. It was only spiritual.

Whatever it was you know it wasn't "actual" and everything you know tells you it could not have happened because you know there is no such thing as magic or miracles, if you think that there is then you leave yourself open to believing anything anyone can think of or suggest, we should all know where to draw the line between fact and fiction.

 

[Neogaia777]

Whatever it was you know it wasn't "actual" and everything you know tells you it could not have happened because you know there is no such thing as magic or miracles, if you think that there is then you leave yourself open to believing anything anyone can think of or suggest, we should all know where to draw the line between fact and fiction.

As a man thinketh, or believeth in his heart, so it "can", and not only "can" but "will", and "if" he truly believes enough, (or becomes "fully convinced" beyond any shed of doubt...) It "will", (usually only through a belief in a much higher power than himself), it will "become so" for him, or "actually happen" that way for that person...

I am about to create a post on "The power of Belief" expounding on this subject, I'll post the link when I do...

God Bless!

 

[Luke17:37]

Genesis, I feel like while I might not fully understand "how", I know that some of Genesis, while it may, or may not be "literally true", in the earthly, worldly sense that a thing is literally true, I know that it is "true" in a "spiritual" way or sense... Which spiritual sense might actually be actually "more real" or "more true" than how all of us, all of we, currently "define" truth in this world currently...

Making a "transition" at some point in the book from that sense of truth, to this current sense; how we currently define truth in this world now or currently at this time... Which is typically how we say literal or logical, based on our "current understanding" of logic and reason, based on our current, shall I say "immature", not fully grown, more "limited" understanding of the "higher" understanding of these, than say, "God"... That is, God's understanding of the "higher" truth of these things which is "spiritual" (truth)...

Which "spiritual" truth, if it ever becomes known, will actually prove to be even "more" logical and "more" reasonable, even more literal, than what we can currently know or can understand about what is logical, reasonable, or literal...

God Bless!

Genesis is literally true.

 

[Neogaia777]

Genesis is literally true.

How do you "define" literal...?

God Bless!